always enough. we'll see. the most important number of the day. takes us to this hour. what a day in washington. all sorts of drama. nothing better to watch right now than "mtp daily." starts right now! if it's thursday, the house pulls the plug on a health care bill vote tonight. tonight, what's the deal? >> we have not gotten enough of our members to get to yes. >> can life imitate the art of the deal or not? >> i think there is 95% agreement on this conservative bill in the house. but in washington, the last 5% matters. >> we'll talk to republican lawmakers for and against the president's health care bill as tonight's planned vote hits a delay. plus, source code. >> look, on this -- this committee, we are not going to ever reveal sources. >> how the battle of the leaks

is flooding the russia investigation. and supreme court filibuster or bluster? >> my vote will be no. and i urge my colleagues to do the same. >> how far will democrats really go to block president trump's supreme court nominee? this is "mtp daily" and it starts right now. good evening, i am chuck todd in washington. welcome to "mtp daily." guess what, if you have covered e rublican congrsional majority since they took over in 2010 today is not a surprise. vingo pull avote, not the first times these guys have had to do that. welcome to a potentially devastating one-two punch for the white house. earlier in the week the fbi went public with an investigation into president trump's campaign investigation. now this mess. the president and his white house team are reeling after both conservative and moderate

republicans essentially derailed a vote that was supposed to be happening a few hours from now on the white house-backed plan to repeal and replace obamacare. it's a stunning rebuke, perhaps not that surprising if you followed the week. after president trump lobbied conservatives and moderates hard in an attempt to get them on board. warning them that they could lose the house majority if they rejected his plan. this afternoon at the white house president trump acknowledged the drama surrounding this vote, just before the plug was officially pulled. >> they know it's no good. everybody knows it's no good. it's only politics because we have a great bill. and i think we have a very good chance but it's only politics. >> is it only politics or policy? president trump met with the freedom caucus today at the white house. that offer was rejected. here is what the chair told

reporters moments ago after news of the vote being postponed was made public? >> does the bill actually lower premiums significantly enough to make a real difference for people who are struggling to pay for health care? i think that we have that at the very core of where we are. i am still a no at this time. i am desperately trying to get to yes. >> the freedom caucus is meeting with speaker ryan right now in his office. today has been a furious day of lobbying behind the scenes. after meeting with conservatives, the white house said it will meet with the moderates. what now? before the vote blew up the white house was adamant. there is no plan b. >> is ere any sort of plan if the bill ds not pass tonight? >> no. it's going to pass. so that's it. >> whoops. the white house says conversations are ongoing and they intend to hold this vote tomorrow morning. it's only the white house that's claiming this. they're now blaming the delay on scheduling. folks, here is the bigger picture. paul ryan president trump wants a win and his white house

appears to be desperate to cut a deal. they floated conservative changes in an effort to get conservatives on board, and now they're meeting with moderates. how will that work? they've tried to play nice with the conference. they've tried threatening the conference. the art of the deal president appears to be ignoring his own advice. in his book, trump wrote, quote, the worst thing you can possibly do in a deal is seem desperate to make it. that makes the other guy smell blood. and then you're dead. hmm. as mr. trump himself once tweeted, no when to walk away from the table. joined by republican congressman kevin brady of texas, who is chairman of the very powerful house ways and means committee. mr. chairman, will the vote happen tomorrow morning? >> i don't know about the timing. but what's clear about today is the votes aren't here yet, but no one is walking away from the table. conservatives, not moderates, not president trump, certainly not house republicans intent on repealing and replacing

obamacare. we have more work to do but, look, this is not unexpected. this is a huge measure. it's normal to hit bumps in the road. we'll stay at the table. at the end of the day we're going to repeal obamacare. >> look, it's not the first time since you guys have been a majority that you have hit these road blocks. you come back, and you make changes in your path. i get that part of it. let me ask you this. why should some of these conservatives take you guys at your word at some of these changes before they know what can pass the senate? >> well, obviously there are huge conservative wins in this bill already. a trillion dollars of tax relief, more than a trillion dollars of spending cuts. the first medicaid reforms in history, no longer funding planned parenthood. that's before we start to return control to the states. this is a hugely conservative bill. their idea is they want to make sure we get as many marker

reforms as we can into the bill. we are constrained because we're playing by the senate rules throughout this. we are all united here. let's do the reforms and make the most affordable health care available, directed not by washington but by the states and communities. >> i have to ask you something here because there is a new cbo score out. just hit the tables. i would assume the good news for you is that it saves more money on the deficit. the coverage number here is -- might be of concern to you. the increase in the number of unissued people relative to the number under current law would reach 21 million in 2020. 24 million in 2026. in 2026 an estimated 52 million people under the age of 65 would be uninsured compared with 28 million people who would lack insurance that year under the current law. so that number goes up a bit. >> well, that's no surprise, though. >> i understand. >> chuck, the question is why.

why uninsured. the answer is, cbo, in their estimates gave us the answer, which is most americans, forced on obamacare today, when given the choice, choose no thanks. this is health care we can't afford, so they are choosing, in fact cbo estimates next year with no changes in medicaid or obamacare other than you're not forced into it, 11 million people washed their hands and say no thank you. so the bulk of that is the freedom not to be forced into the plans they can't use and don't want. >> what about people who do want the plans but feel as if the coverage that they get, they can't afford the coverage that they want. they may be able to afford a ne lower insurance policy with very little coverage -- take all the mandatory. >> the tax credits we provide -- so that's available to them. states will be able to prove a broad range of products that are not available in obamacare

today. some of them will be very robust, comprehensive all the way through. others will be more targeted to regions, to populations, to age groups, to people who may need some of those essential benefits but not all. and see, that's where cbo has, i think a nearly impossible job, not just estimating coverage but price increases as well. i think they're doing their best modeling on this, but in truth, it is really hard to know the products that states will approve. >> one last question on this, though. when, in any sort of economic model, when you ask an industry or sector to provide more choices that somehow it's going to bring the overall cost down? >> two right off the bat -- >> the costs go up over time, and everybody has to pay for that. if you narrow the amount of choice, sometimes you can bring costs down. >> that's just the opposite. look, you have two huge health care plans. medicare advantage, a republican

idea, and the medicare medicine, prescription drug plan, both of them free-market oriented. give seniors dramatic choice. medicare advantage is the most popular plans, are the most popular plans for seniors. and the medicare prescription drug plan, not only is that hugely popular, it has cost 40% less than what was estimated and the premiums, ten years later, still haven't hit even the minimum democrats propose. so yeah, the free market, lots of choices, targeted and tailored to individuals, not washington, already proven to work for americans. >> you believe this bill, with a few changes, over time, will it cover more people or fewer? >> i think it will have more access than the health care today. here is why. in two out of three americans forced into obamacare and with generous subsidies have said no thk you, they've found a way to get out of this. i keep thinking in states like

texas, we have so many people who want health care, they can use and can afford, that they're going to look at these plans tailored to our communities and our regions and say this is what's important to me. >> kevin brady, chairman of house ways and means. we'll watch tomorrow. will the vote happen tomorrow or more like next week? what's realistic? >> we'll meet tonight at 7:00 to talk about the state of play, how we continue to work forward, and then our leader, kevin mccarthy will ultimately schedule the vote. >> fair enough. i will leave it there. sir, thanks for coming on, sharing your views. >> you bet. quickly joining me now from capitol hill to give you more detail on the cbo score, i got it out there to get at least the coverage number there. a slight increase overall in what they think coverage. but a savings in the deficit. fill in the blanks for me, kasie. >> i am digesting this along with you. this is a score for the manager's amendment.

this was a bill that was negotiated initially by leadership and included changes to medicaid to help bring some moderator members along who were concerned particularly about how this bill would affect the elderly, people under the age of 65, not eligible for medicare and how high the premiums could be. that's a big part of where the reduced savings number is coming from, why this version of the bill costs, according to the cbo, about $150 billion more than the previous version of this bill. but this does say that the number ofeopl insured, that change would basically be ne glijible. the first estimates from the cbo were the noms that shocknumbers shocked people. the number of uninsured in 2026. you're still looking at those same numbers. it's important to note, chuck, our conversation about the bill has gone way beyond the policy

that the cbo scored and that we are seeing right now. >> it is no longer really a policy debate. it's a political debate. kasie hunt. thank you. >> that's for sure. joined now by republican senator mike lee of utah. who has been calling for republicans to ditch this health care plan and go back to the drawing board. senator lee, welcome back to the show. >> thank you. >> i should call you know ext-- this morning. i don't know why we would be rewriting the bill to cajole a few people to come along. we should go back to the drawing board and come up with free-market solutions that will actually bring down costs. is this the drawing board moment for do they still believe they won't get the votes? >> i think this could be our drawing board moment if we take it as that. it doesn't necessarily have to mean that we have to go back to square one. it does mean that we have to ask honest questions about why this wentown in flames, why it

dn't wor the simplest way to answer that is to point out that this bill didn't take care of what's been making health care way too expensive. and we can answer that question, then we can get to the point where we can get enough votes to get this passed. >> i have to say, senator, i hear you on the expensive health care. i have heard -- we have heard a lot of politicians promise bringing down the cost of health care. i think what's confusing about this bill and obamacare, is what costs are we aiming at? bringing down the cost of health care itself or bringing down the cost to the consumer? because right now it seems one was focused only on consumer, but we weren't getting the big drivers of health care. you tell me. this bill doesn't seem it did either. >> that's my point is that we do need to focus on both of those. what this bill would have done is it would have solved, perhaps, one set of problems but created another set of problems,

in part by not solving the problems with the obamacare regulations. the health insurance regulations were driving up the cost of health care, of health insurance. the premiums that people were paying. and that, in turn, was reflected in the costs that the government was paying for health care across the board. i think we do have to take a step-by-step approach and one that acknowledges that we do need to repeal obamacare, root and branch as republicans have been pledging to do, for seven years. if we do that, then we'll be in a much better position to go back and figure out what comes next. >> lay this out. i was just going to say, you're in charge here now. you are calling the shots. full repeal. hard stop. then what? >> okay. so there are two ways we could go. go big or go small. either one is fine. going small means just repealing. and then having an iterative process to decide what comes next. you could also go big and in one bill you could repeal and then

expand the use of hsas, allow for the purche of hlth insurance across state lines. and incde a numberf other provisions that wld help bring down the cost of health care. either one is fine with me, just as long as we do them. but in doing either one, we do have a do what we've said we would do for the last seven years which is repeal obamacare. >> is it possible, though -- is it impossible to get you and, say, charlie dent, okay, maybe the most moderate republican in the house, and you, one of the more conservative, small-government guys in the senate. is it possible to get you both to support the same bill? given what's been passed and what the expectations are now of the voter? >> i think it is. i want to be clear. i don't know mr. dent very well. >> fair enough. >> i don't work with him in the same chamber. if i were to analogize him to

come of my colleagues. >> susan collins. >> sure. i think there is a way to get the majority of the members of mo both houses of congress voting for the same bill. in order to do that we have to do what we said we would do, which is repeal obamacare. >> what do you make of the various leadership threats out there? you have probably heard it on the house freedom caucus. this will probably cost republicans the house if this goes down. mitch mcconnell, i would hate to be a repubn whose vote prevented us from keeping the promise we made to the american people for seven years now. sounds like a threat. is that an effective way to get the votes? >> those are two very different statements. with respect to mitch mcconnell's statement, it's true on its face. i wouldn't want to be the person who caused us not to repeal obamacare. i think what mitch mcconnell is saying -- >> what if you didn't like the

replacement? >> well, this bill doesn't repeal obamacare as completely as it needs to. so we do have to get there. as to the other statement, to the statement to the effect that this particular bill has to pass, and if this particular bill doesn't pass it's going to be armageddon. dogs and cats living together on the streets. book of revelation type stuff. that makes no sense. it's absurd. they know better. they shouldn't say that. >> should this be done in the senate first? i know technically the house has to do a revenue bill. but don't you need to find out how -- what bill you can get passed in the senate before you make house members walk some idealogical planks they are not comfortable with? >> you could do it that way. but you have to have consensus first. you have to know it can pass the house and the senate first. i normally don't like the idea of shrink wrapping a proposal

and running it through both houses of congress and saying this is how it has to pass. if you are going to do it, and there are some circumstances where that kind of thing may be the only approach that can work. this might be one of those circumstances. you have to do the hard work of making sure you have enough votes. it's not enough to simply say we're going to shame you into voting for this or warning people, quite falsely, if this particular iteration of this particular bill doesn't pass that everyone is going to lose. that's absurd. that's no way to run a legislative process. >> i have to ask you one thing about president trump's credibility. he did a lengthy interview with "time" magazine on the issue of truth. again, this is an interview today, senator. again, the president is asked about the business of ted cruz's father with lee harvey oswald. you said his father was somehow involved with lee harvey oswald in the jfk assassination. the president's response was simply this. well, that was in a newspaper. no, no, no.

i like ted cruz. he is a friend of mine. that was in a newspaper. i didn't say that. i was referring to a newspaper. he dn't once retract what he said. does that bother you that he is eroding his own credibility this way? >> look, i never understood the argument he was making at the outset. this is the first i have heard of it coming up more recently. i can't imagine that he is going to try to defend it. anyone who knows ted cruz's father as i do, that is not a credible claim. but i am really not sure what you are asking. >> i guess it's the whole idea that he is willing to just believe anything he reads, regurgitate it, never retract it. >> yeah. are you saying that he is doubling down on that? >> is he eroding his own credibility over time, doing this? >> anytime anyone says something that isn't true, and it can be

proven not to be true, that tends not to be good for one's credibility. as to why he is talking about this again, i really don't know. you'll have to ask him. >> fair enough. senator lee, i will leave it there. quite a busy day. i know you're hoping to get back to your state and do some politicking back there. thank you for being here. >> thank you. a lot more on the health care bill vote delay after the break. later this hour, how a flood of leaks could change the tide of the russian investigation. we'll talk to former spy chief general michael hayden. keep it here.

welcome back. in the midst of the fast-moving health care situation on capitol hill this afternoon, i spoke with california governor jerry brown. i asked him in his concern is that the bill could create a huge budget hole in his state. >> well, i am more concerned about the millions of people who won't have health care. that's why i say the bill is not health care reform or repeal and

replace. it's death, disease and suffering. it's a terrible thing. now, yeah, it will cost money. billions of dollars, which we wouldn't have. around the country we're talking hundreds of billions. it's a disaster. if it does happen to get out of the house, i imagine the senate will take a very hard look at it. anybody with their name on this bill, in most districts in america, their name will be mud. no question about it. >> you can catch more of my exclusive sit-down this week with governor jerry brown this sunday on "meet the press."

dear predictable, there's no other way to say this. it's over. i've found a permanent escape from monotony. together, we are perfectly balanced, our senses awake, our hearts racing as one. i know this is sudden, but they say: if you love something... set it free. see you around, giulia ♪ welcome back to "mtp daily." let's bring in our all-star congressional panel. rame ramesh pa nuru. charles. and the mayor, the marry in absentia of the capitol hill

press corps. carl, what the health care -- heck happened? did it surprise you? >> no surprises. it's embarrassing for the republicans. they were going to get off to a big start to show they can finally govern and instead stepped on a banana peel. most republicans in congress have never had to pass a bill that they were going to be accountable for and i think some of them are honestly terrified. >> it seems that there is confusion here. trump is having a polital negotiation and mark meadows and the freedom caucus and others are trying to have a policy negotiation. is that fair to say? >> i don't think anybody who has been talking about these meetings has come away thinking president trump is a master of all the details involved in health care. he doesn't claim to be. i think there is a problem here because people have these

specific concerns. they're interrelated. you pull on one thread, it affects everything else. and it's very hard to negotiate under those circumstances. >> add to the idea of what carl said with the idea of all these people who have not passed a bill and then you have a president who ran on vagueness and the fact that he had a good reputation, the fact that he could make deals. now he's focused on this idea that he actually has to know the intricacies of different bills and has to satisfy two warring groups. what's amazing to me today is that you have the head of the two groups talking and paul ryan, from what i've heard, has yet to come out as forcefully as the leader of the freedom caucus or the tuesday group. and i think that's remarkable. >> here is what i don't get, carl. why are we expending so much energy on a bill that has no chance of passing the united states senate? if i were a house member, i would say, i saw what happened to house democrats. i am not walking a plank until

you walk the plank. >> i think what -- you were right with mike lee when you said this is now a political fight. to me what's going on now is just let's get this out of the house. >> that's clearly what it became. >> let's get it out of the house. dump it on the senate. see what they can do with it. >> i don't want it. you guys take it. >>hehave to show they can do this. it's going to be a huge embarrassment. as she said, he is the deal closer, not going to close the first big deal. >> initially they had a strategy that worked to move quickly. repeal first, and then later on, you delay. >> move quickly. >> so criticized. they realized they had to have some replace elements. you can't do that quickly. that's the problem. >> i mean, i think the idea that you have -- i have sat in some of the freedom caucus meetings where they say, we should pass what we passed in 2015. that won't fly anymore. people expect you to govern and have a bill. you're dealing with people who say we don't need to do all the replacement stuff.

we can just repeal. that's not going to work. >> carl, this is not old school. used to be. pass the bill. make it bigger. make it bigger. the irony is you need sweeteners for charlie dent and you need to give it a diet for mark meadows. >> i have seen mark meadows saying, i am trying to get to yes. the closer he gets to yes the further to no susan collins and charlie dent get. i don't thi . >> the irony is donald trump got caught in the worst possible position for mr. art of the deal. he needs the deal more than they do, doesn't he? >> i think so. this is a really big test. i don't know if it's the first big test because there have been so many tests. it's a huge test to his presidency to say he brought all these people in at the white house. you have your photo-op. sean spicer out there saying this is going to get done this afternoon.

now it's a very easy thing to understand, if his presidency is on the line in this way. it's easy to understand that you made a promise and it's not happening. >> house republicans who are saying no on this bill do not feel they're taking a risk in saying no on it. the risk they are taking is with trump, not with their own political fortunes. >> this is where i think the unpredictability of trump will be fascinating. he doesn't have a lot of patience. he could say, you know what, i make as many changes as i can from hhs. i want to go to tax cuts. i'm out of here. >> i think that's the dream of republicans. you know what, we can walk away. obamacare will collapse. president obama, nancy pelosi will get the blame. that's not going to happen. if what goes wrong now is in the hands of the republicans and donald trump. they're going to be blamed for whatever goes on. so, you know, t need to get something done here or else the rest of their year isoing to be a big struggle.

>> gorsuch. we got gorsuch. here is what i always hear. we've got gorsuch. you guys are sticking around. a lot to unpack. a few other stories out there, including the one i just mentioned which we'll talk about right after this. ( ♪ ) at corning, i test smart glass that goes all over the world. but there's no place like home. there's always something different to do like skiing in the winter, jet skiing in the summer. we can do everything. new york state is filled with bright minds like samantha's. to find the companies and talent of tomorrow, search for our page, jobsinnewyorkstate on linkedin. . i realize that ah, that $100k is not exactly a fortune.

well, a 103 yeah, 103. well, let me ask you guys. how long did it take you two to save that? a long time. then it's a fortune. well, i'm sure you talk to people all the time who think $100k is just pocket change.

right now we're just talking to you. i told you we had a fortune. yes, you did. getting closer to your investment goals stts wit convertion. schedule a complimentary goal planning sessi today welcome back. the senate minority leader, chuck schumer, officially announced today what we have known since president trump named judge neil gorsuch as his nominee for the supreme court. democrats would like to try to

filibuster his nomination, forcing republicans to get 60 yes votes to advance govern to a final confirmation vote. eight senate democrats would need to join republicans to move him to confirmation. these are ten democrats who are ones to watch, the folks up for reelection in 2018 in states donald trump carried. but the real drama in this vote is not going to be the filibuster, it's what these ten people do. will democrats force senate majority leader mitch mcconnell to use the so-called nuclear option and blow up the senate rules for good so that govern would only need a simple majority to be confirmed? both sides claim they'd like to avoid that option. for that reason some democrats may vote with republicans to bypass a filibuster but then oppose judge gorsuch in the final vote. if you are a red state democrat you may be looking for something to claim that you voted for trump on something. govern may be it as well. we'll be watching. and we'll be right back.

remember when you said men are superior drivers? yeah... yeah, then how'd i get this... ...allstate safe driving bonus check? ...only allstate sends you a bonus check for every six months you're accident free. silence. it's good to be in, good hands.

. well aware. i read it yesterday. the point i am making is when you use a term like associate and all these subjective terms, there is is a reason you are doing it. you don't have anything concrete. if you do, come back and ask is anyone in the white house. anyone in the transition. when you throw out a vague term like that, it's a catch-all. >> welcome back to "mtp daily." it was an amazing almost laughable moment today. sean spicer keeps trying to distance the administration and the president from his former campaign manager and campaign chairman, paul manafort. the story is not going away and it seems like we are heading to an escalating contest of leaks on both sides of the aisle. yesterday the ranking democrat on house intel committee adam schiff told me there is direct evidence of collusion between the trump campaign and russia, that happened after the top republican on the committee came out with his own information citing a, quote, source, that the intel committee incidentally

collected information about the trump transition, proving trump right. we are in a slipperyvote. joining me now, michael hayden, former director of theia and the nsa. for people who are in conspiracies, they assume you leave here on a black helicopters. general hayden, let me start with this issue of the leaking issue that is going on. >> sure. >> obviously we are at the point where can we have faith in congress to investigate this story fairly? >> i think yesterday was actually a dark day. and i know both the chair and senior member of the committee. like and respect them both. but what we saw yesterday, i think, was the committee chairman and perhaps a little bit from the senior member as well undercutting the legitimacy of at least this committee to conduct that kind of an investigation. one hopes that the senate committee can actually maintain this bipartisanship and more objective view.

but we'll have to see. >> walk me through raw intelligence here. look, it seems like the most logical explanation that happened yesterday with devin nunes is this. somebody wants to help out president trump and said, just go find me something that can give a grain, a kernel of truth to what he said about some sort of wiretapping of associates or something. and they may have found raw intelligence. what does it look like? >> to your concept, first of all, i can see a thin ray of light there to give the president an off-ramp. so we just get this behind us because what he said is certainly not true. what i think happened -- and i watched chairman nunes' comments carefully and even read the text. he was very careful. it's lawful. it's court ordered. it's foreign intelligence. so it has nothing to do with any of the investigations. he talked about it in november, december, january. and so, chuck, my lights kind of lit up.

i think i know what this is. i have got no doubt. i am trying to surmise. >> your experience. >> i have been director of nsa during two presidential transitions. foreign embassies in this town o might actlly be legitimate targets of surveillance. they light up after the election. i think they really lit up after this one because they were as surprised as you and i were that the outcome was what it was. you probably had this rich dialogue between embassies here and national capitols where the c capitals want to know what's going on? who is up, who is down? >> names get mentioned all of a sudden. >> so you've have the this information. i am speaking ill ustratively. now you have to balance the privacy right with the reason you are doing it in the first place. it does no good to send out a

message saying embassy x talked with person x. you need to put flesh in there. >> what's your obligation at nsa. if you inadvertently essentially found yourself with information about a u.s. person that wasn't part of the target? >> i'm going to pull you through a theological knot-hole, okay. inadvertent means in our language that you shouldn't have been on the conversation. incidental means that you're fine on the conversation but you incidentally pick up information about a protected person. >> you may be talking to somebody who you had no idea was secretly spying for another government. >> sure. >> but the investigators know this. >> actually, in this case, it's pretty clear to me -- the chairman was pretty careful with his language once he got questions from your kinds of folks. i think this is overwhelmingly not information from or to an american. i think it's overwhelmingly information about an american. >> foreign to foreign conversation.

>> foreign to foreign in which they're doing what you would expect them to do. what's going on here? >> it's interesting. he said, there is fisa warrants all over the place. none of these have anything to do with russia. are there hundrs of fisa warrants out? >> i won't answer that. fisa is a routine tool -- >> more than a few? >> yes. of course. there are legitimate foreign intelligence targets who might be in the united states. and because of that, i mean, it's not a heavy lift to prove sergey kislyak is the agent of a foreign power. you have to do it because he is in america. >> let me ask you the other part of this. we have gotten to another conspiracy theory thanks to the fox news commentator which president trump related. what's our relationship with the british spy agencies? has that -- could that even be use as a circuitous route?

>> the relationship is deep, historic, and actually quite emotional. i will share with you, having been the head of cia and nsa. nsa is closer to the gchq than the american cia. that relationship is very deep. there are absolute rules. you saw mike rogers in the testimony. the timber in mike's voice changed when he was responding to that question. that would be a violation of the five eyes agreement. chuck, i can't ask them to do anything that's illegal for me and illegal for them and the reverse is also true. >> one final question here. has to do with who knows what. nsa people might say nothing. cia people might say something when it comes to the russia investigation. but ultimately this is an fbi led investigation. >> absolutely. oh, yes. >> how much is cia and nsa out of the loop when it comes to an active fbi investigation, even when it involves international

espionage? >> very much out of the loop. even when it intimately involves us. an example, say we actually do have a counter intelligence investigation going on and the fbi has a subject. and they're narrowing in on him. the sharing of information about that is very thin and very infrequent. only when you have information, at cia or nsa, that they need for their investigation. >> there is only one connduit? does only dni know these things. >> no. there can be sharing between the agencies. but it's on a strict need-to-know basis. >> the cia director could not confirm nor deny what was going on at the fbi because they wouldn't know. >> no. i would never attempt to do that. >> general michael hayden. appreciate the tutorial. inadvertent and -- >> incidental. >> that's your vocabulary lesson

of the day when it comes to spy agencies. thank you, sir. when we come back, telling the truth and president trump. to a different company with car insurance, and i was not happy with the customer service. we have switched back over and we feel like we're back home now. the process through usaa is so effortless, that you feel like you're a part of the family. i love that i can pass the membership to my children, and that they can be protected. we're the williams family, and we're usaa members for life. call usaa today to talk about your insurance needs. actually making your body feel better... that's exactly what tommie copper does for people everywhere. they call it "wearable wellness," and tommie copper has infused it into everything they do. why not experience the difference tommie copper can make in your life? go to tommiecopper.com, enter your e-mail to become part of the tommie copper community, and get 15% off your entire order, plus free shipping.

life hurts, feel better. welcome back. tonight i am obsessed with president trump's interview with "time" magazine. it's astounding. the parade of misleading statements, evasions and outright falsehoods. he did it this week. let me explain. no. there's too much. let me sum up. on wiretaps of the president

says when i said wiretapping it was in quotes. that's true. except for the times that it wasn't. on fbi director comey' denial of the president's wiretap charge. i have articles that say it happened. then devin nunes had a news conference. both actual quotes from the interview. the article is from the pro-trump breitbart website. the news conferences yesterday did nothing to back out president trump's claim that president obama had him wiretapped. on the claim that 3 million people voted illegally. all incidentally for hillary clinton. trump, well, i think i will be proved right about that too. president went on to say twice he is forming a committee to investigate. there is no evidence to support the charge, and it's not clear how much progress has been made in forming a committee. on his claim that muslims celebrated 9/11 in new jersey, well, if you look at the reporter, he wrote the story in the "washington post." in fact, there is novidence that may such celebrations occurred, and it was an accusation that was being looked

in. on whether ted cruz's father was with lee harvey oswald. it was in the newspapers. you mean the "national enquirer," yes. he told times interviewer, i guess i can't be doing so badly because i am president and you're not. you know? no pinochios there. you don't let anything keep you sidelined.

that's why you drink ensure. with 9 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. for the strength and energy to get back to doing... ...what you love. ensure. always be you. the lay panel is back. i want to talk about the president's credibility here. because we just went through this "time" magazine, it is an astounding interview. number one, i am shock thad he did it. because the premise was about truth. you got to give him credit for doing the interview. but if he can't get this health care bill passed, we got monday which was a devastating thing with the russia thing, is he already losing whatever political capital he had in washington? >> well, he still bought the the

approval of most republicans, republicans control both chambers, that is something is that will take a while, if it fades at all. but there is no question he has taken a hit with the public at large. a lot of the things he has done have helped him with his base a little bit, repelled everybody else. he doesn't seem to even care about that. >> i mean the premise of this interview and what i took away from reading it is he was doubling down on the campaign trail. he feels like he is rewarded for being able to spread these untrut mbe lies, that he can st continue to do this. >> what's the reward? i always keep hearing this, what's the reward? is that how he views the reward right now? because his approval rating is slowly going down, even few look at rasmussen, they can't even dial it up any more than 48% these days. >> i think people on the hill are willing to accept a lot of

this from trump, you know, we're going to get stuff done, now, if they're not going to get their stuff done, what's their tolerance for these kind of things? what jumped out at me in that interview was the fact that he says, well, i just read that in a paper. even though some of it is fake, i read it. i am going to repeat it. >> that is totally new for us, most presidents would never admit they're getting their information from the media. >> this is -- there was a reason why many of the conservative intellectual crowd never got, it was a lack of intellectual curiosity. i thought that bothered the right intellectuals as much as a eng. >> that's right. but we were talking about how his standing has declined, he had two years of lousy polls and became president of the united states. now, he doesn't have hillary clinton as a foil anymore. i do think that changes things, it was his dishonesty versus her

dishonesty. i don't know if the suppress enough or quite as good as having a head-to-head compareson. >> it's remarkable, it's the newspaper the media, also going at the legitimacy of the media, in this way, if i'm wrong, it's because these people who are so critical of me are also wrong. >> that to me can be really in long term that can degrade us. >> carl, he doesn't -- that's i think the question and wha i find fascinating in washington is how many people want to believe it's all planned, i think the most honest thing he said other than i'm president, you got to go by instinct. >> i think it was undiluted trump if that's the right word. what i took away is we are never going to get donald trump to admit he was wrong about anything. >> that just won't happen. >> he was presented with the list of i don't know how many fact, where there has been pretty verifiable everyday showing he was wrong. he just will not. he will be terrible to have to

interview as a witness. >> he has done plenty of that in the past. >> that's been a problem. >> the one thing quickly on the motor fraud, he is saying it is more than 'million. >> it's the registrations. >> the legal votes, illegal registrations. >> his permission is we haven't seen much movement there. >> eighth fish story. he feels like, oh, i'm be proven right at some point, so i can keep telling you this. >>run one voter fraud in tennessee, goodday, we say that around here, we'll be right back with a big win that went way too much under the radar last night. stay with us. i'm a concrete mason.

i own my own company. i had some severe fatigue, some funny rashes. finally, listening to my wife, went to a doctor. and i became diagnosed with hodgkin's lymphoma ...that diagnosis was tough. i had to put my trust in somebody. when i first met steve, we recommended chemotherapy, and then we did high dose therapy and then autologous stem cell transplant.

unfortunately, he went on to have progressive disease i thought that he would be a good candidate for immune therapy. it's an intravenous medicine that is going to make his immune system evade the tumor. with chemotherapy, i felt rough, fatigue, nauseous. and with immune therapy we've had such a positive result. i'm back to working hard. i've honestly never felt this great. i believe the future of immunotherapy at ctca is very bright. the evolution of cancer care is here. learn more at cancercenter.com appointments available now.

>> well, in case you missed it, and there is a food chance you did, team usa won it's first ever world baseball conference, blowing out puerto rico, 8-0 in dodgers stadium, whoever would have won, america would have won. you may have missed it, it was on so late t. first pitch was scheduled eastern time and things didn't gets under way until 9:21, it's a very big deal in many of the participating country it's not the u.s. yet. it won't be fully successful until americans are into it. don't start things so late. we got four years until the next year's baseball classic. so let's tweak it. i'm betting kickoff for the best season the baseball season. maybe you come up with ways you

do political fares in february an wouldn't it be cool to have all star week? i love the idea of all star week being the semi-finals and finals for the wbc, baseball matters in the merchandise summer's classic, that's all we have tonight, "for the record" with greta, it will never end. you take it away. >> pretty strange, chuck, yes, this is ginning to look like the sopranos, vote yes or else. one gop law maker of iowa taking a direct hit from his house leadership. he pledged to vote no how the house superpac overseen by paul ryan is cutting off congressman young, no money. just to drive the point home the superpac closed its iowa officer and it's leaving town and that's a hint-hint to ever